YEC Bob Sorensen - compulsive liar exposed

Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

Moderator: Moderators

Curtis Long - angry liar

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:05 pm

Meanwhile:
https://www.facebook.com/TQEPDebunked/p ... 1096872791
Me: "Meanwhile I've sent the following email re a 'new' Sorensen article that hasn't yet appeared here: [link to this thread and the post about Lake Eyre]
Long: "Logic is off the table, you and your fluffer Hitler-Robber and your false accounts to fluff yourself. Obviously you're trying to censor your intellectual superiors by straw manning the hell out of them, lying, misrepresenting, ridicule. You're having your circle fest of liars and fools. Th combined IQ here is about 57. I just come here to tease the idiot monkeys."

What a waste of space these people are.


ADDENDUM on 14 September: this post really is alluding to this separate thread:
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=3825&p=51655#p51655
Last edited by a_haworthroberts on Thu Sep 14, 2017 7:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8094
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

CMI quietly withdraw a misleading claim

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Sep 14, 2017 6:31 pm

I received an email from one of the recipients of my email about Lake Eyre (a YEC as it happens but not one who obviously lies).

I replied as follows, copied to all original recipients as well (I've corrected one minor typo):

"Having checked online, the world's oldest lake is thought to be Lake Baikal in Russia. But maybe Lake Eyre is still considered the oldest salt lake.

You mention CMI having removed a reference to the 'world's oldest lake'; whilst that 1995 article correctly (I think) referred to the 'world's oldest salt lake' having looked more closely I see that (although he has not responded to my email for which he was a bcc recipient) Don Batten or possibly one of his colleagues has slightly amended his 2009 article - on 13 September 2017 (there are still 101 'evidences' in his list as previously and number 27 is now to do with unreferenced claims about the Arches National Park in the USA and material concerning the 'twelve apostle' sea stacks in Australia) - with the previous evidence 27 concerning Lake Eyre having been REMOVED. (I cannot recall whether Batten referred correctly to the 'world's oldest salt lake' or incorrectly to the 'world's oldest lake' though the RationalWiki link I posted implies it may have been the latter; it quoted evidence 27 as follows: "the amount of salt in the world's oldest lake contradicts its supposed age and suggests an age more consistent with its formation after Noah's Flood, which is consistent with a young age of the earth".

This is interesting and I am thus copying this exchange to all of the original cc and bcc recipients because some of them might only view my original email AFTER the Batten article was altered - and be confused. (The amendment of 13 Sept is welcome, but why have CMI not been UPFRONT via email rather than 'secretive' about the Batten list being amended yesterday?)

Bottom line - without any specific announcement CMI have just withdrawn a misleading claim from a list on their website.

I've only been able to view the abstract of this btw:
http://www.publish.csiro.au/sr/SR9840119"
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8094
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Sorensen on his soapbox

Postby a_haworthroberts » Tue Sep 19, 2017 9:32 pm

https://www.facebook.com/Piltdown.Superman/
"Science does not support evolution. There are two distinct signs of desperation from Darwin's Stormtroopers that support the idea that they know their evidence is paltry at best. One is the vituperative and obsessive nature of their attacks on creationists... A second sign of evolutionists' desperation is the amazing level of imagination in the "explanations" that they offer...".

The issue is that science does not remotely support young earth creationism. On the second point, unlike mainstream science young earth creationism's wild imagination is normally based (loosely) upon Bible texts and NOT upon actual scientific evidence or scientific knowledge.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8094
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Sorensen supernovae

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Sep 20, 2017 12:02 am

http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/2017/09 ... ments.html
Supernovae not possible yet in a '6,000 year old universe'.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8094
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Previous

Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron